Is it recreation over for Microsoft’s $69 billion acquisition of Activision Blizzard?
The UK Competitors and Markets Authority (CMA) introduced earlier this week that it’ll sue to dam the deal, and the regulator appears to have caught Microsoft, Activision Blizzard and lots of business watchers without warning.
“I actually don’t perceive CMA’s argument right here, apart from ‘American firms unhealthy,’” stated Ana Milicevic, co-founder and principal at Sparrow Advisers.
In the meantime, Activision Blizzard CEO Bobby Kotick referred to as the CMA’s resolution “irrational” in an interview with Bloomberg on Thursday.
However the CMA had its causes.
It cited Microsoft’s dominance over the rising cloud gaming market, which may turn into extra entrenched if Activision Blizzard’s common online game franchises, together with Name of Responsibility, had been made unique to Microsoft’s Xbox consoles, app retailer and cloud gaming product.
Pundits predicted Microsoft would use Xandr to create an ad-supported online game content material fortress, with the advert tech enterprise getting unique entry to Microsoft’s gaming IP. Any ambitions in that route could now be on maintain.
Forward within the cloud
The antitrust argument towards the Activision Blizzard deal hinges on the exclusivity of Activision Blizzard’s recreation titles which, along with Name of Responsibility, embody the Sweet Crush, Diablo, World of Warcraft and Overwatch franchises.
Microsoft was aligned with the CMA’s preliminary requirement for a 10-year nonexclusive licensing settlement, which might guarantee an extended window for Activision Blizzard recreation titles to be accessible on different gaming consoles and platforms.
However console exclusivity wasn’t the principle challenge for the CMA. In response to the CMA’s report this week, if Name of Responsibility was unique to Xbox, it wouldn’t be “financially useful” to Microsoft, and PlayStation wouldn’t be materially harmed if Xbox may cost much less for Activision video games or supply unique perks for avid gamers who play these video games on Xbox consoles.
The sticking level, as an alternative, was the cloud gaming market.
Microsoft controls three-fifths of the worldwide cloud gaming market. And with Xbox Cloud Gaming, Home windows and Microsoft Azure underneath one roof, Microsoft can flex anticompetitive benefits over any cloud gaming opponents, in response to the CMA.
Cloud gaming is a nascent enterprise, however even main gamers have struggled to make a splash. Google’s Stadia cloud gaming enterprise shut down earlier this yr. The battle by different firms (even Google) to face up an alternate is a transparent concern.
Plus, the CMA had entry to inner communications by Microsoft and Activision Blizzard execs discussing their respective methods ought to the merger occur or not.
“The proof accessible to the CMA confirmed that Microsoft would discover it commercially useful to make Activision’s video games unique to its personal cloud gaming service,” Tim Cowen, chair of the antitrust observe at UK legislation agency Preiskel and Co, instructed AdExchanger.
But when the deal doesn’t occur, Cowen stated, the CMA concluded Activision Blizzard can be incentivized to supply its online game IP on non-Microsoft cloud providers.
App retailer competitors
Microsoft has been public about wanting Activision Blizzard to function the muse for a cell app retailer to compete with Google and Apple.
“That’s exactly the situation the CMA is making an attempt to guard from,” stated Milicevic.
But, the opportunity of Microsoft creating extra competitors within the app retailer market wasn’t sufficient to allay anticompetitive issues concerning the cloud gaming sector. And the CMA seemingly wasn’t satisfied that Microsoft getting into the app retailer enterprise would result in wholesome competitors, anyway.
“Creating one other walled backyard app retailer is much less enticing as a aggressive market construction than a number of apps accessible over the open net,” Cowen stated.
Regardless of the recognition of cell properties like Name of Responsibility Cell and Sweet Crush, Activision Blizzard’s IP alone most likely wouldn’t be sufficient for Microsoft to construct a viable app retailer, stated Andre Sevigny, CRO at Pubfinity and former director of monetization for the Microsoft Informal Video games Studio.
The priority, as an alternative, is {that a} Microsoft app retailer would give Microsoft the prospect to promote extra Recreation Go subscriptions, Sevigny stated, “serving to it develop its cloud gaming enterprise and, within the CMA’s eyes, Microsoft’s dominance in that area.”
What about in-game advertisements?
Nonetheless, antitrust issues about dominance within the cloud gaming market could possibly be making a mountain out of a molehill.
The console gaming market, as an illustration, accounted for $35 billion in gross sales income final yr, in comparison with the cloud gaming market at $5 billion, in response to analysis consultancy Omdia.
And cloud gaming gross sales revenues are additionally eclipsed by the rising online game advert market. Gaming advert income throughout cell, digital video and esports was $8.6 billion in 2022, which eMarketer expects will develop to $9.5 billion this yr.
Microsoft may additionally mix cloud and console gaming with in-game promoting. Final yr, the corporate filed a patent for expertise to serve customized advertisements by way of Xbox consoles and its cloud gaming service.
However the potential for Microsoft to develop its share of the online game advert market doesn’t seem to been a serious consideration for the CMA – even though the regulator has blocked different acquisitions, just like the Meta-GIPHY merger, resulting from issues about one entity controlling an excessive amount of of the advert market in an rising media channel.
Though the CMA didn’t explicitly name out Microsoft’s advert enterprise in its ruling, the regulator is clearly involved about the opportunity of Microsoft increasing its walled backyard, Cowen stated.
That stated, it’s unclear simply how a lot of a leg up the Activision Blizzard deal would give Microsoft within the online game advert market.
“I don’t suppose a big promoting enterprise would have essentially adopted from the transaction if it occurred,” stated Brian Wieser, principal at Madison and Wall and former world president of enterprise intelligence at GroupM. Outdoors of cell gaming, ad-supported video gaming stays a small market, he stated.
What’s subsequent?
Microsoft may nonetheless transfer ahead with the acquisition and easily keep away from promoting Activision Blizzard titles within the UK, which is the world’s sixth largest marketplace for video video games, in response to Newzoo BV.
“Whereas [the UK] is a gorgeous market, finally one can skip it, particularly if the broader EU market is in play,” stated Milicevic. “That post-Brexit actuality doesn’t appear to be readily accepted within the UK.”
However slicing the UK can be impractical, stated Sevigny. “Simply think about all of the work required to carve out the UK from all the present distribution and licensing agreements that Microsoft would inherit from the deal.”
Microsoft and Activision Blizzard plan to enchantment the CMA’s resolution, nevertheless it’s troublesome to win a reversal. The CMA’s appeals tribunal solely considers whether or not a call was authorized and rational and whether or not correct process was adopted, in response to a Wall Avenue Journal report on the ruling.
Nonetheless, Cowen stated procedural questions may work in Microsoft’s favor, since “the CMA seems to be to have positioned loads of weight on Activision Blizzard’s inner paperwork and plans that weren’t sure.”
Even when the CMA’s resolution is struck down or Microsoft decides to cease promoting Activision Blizzard titles within the UK, the merger remains to be topic to approval by the Federal Commerce Fee within the US and the European Fee within the EU.
